Resources and publications

This template can be used to establish a plain English Code of Conduct for board members or your general PBC staff.

ORIC newsletter about CEO accountability. 

PM&C commissioned SVA Consulting to understand, measure or estimate and value the changes resulting from the investment in five IPAs across Australia. The Social Return on Investment (SROI) methodology was used to complete each of these analyses, which were informed by interviews with 143 stakeholders as well as desktop research canvassing relevant qualitative and quantitative data.

The Free Management Library provides free, easy-to-access, online articles to develop yourself, other individuals, groups and organizations (whether the organization is for-profit or nonprofit). Over the past 15 years, the Library has grown to be one of the world's largest well-organized collections of these types of articles and resources.

Prescribed Bodies Corporate (PBCs) can access funding through one or more of PM&C's four funding streams. If you are unsure which funding stream is appropriate to apply for you can seek advice from the Native Title Representative Body/Service Provider (NTRB/SP) in your region or your PM&C Regional Office on 1800 079 098.

This document provides useful advice about the different PM&C funing options for PBCs

This guide provides a general overview of the National Landcare Programme (NLP) investment, which includes investing in projects that build on our partnerships with Indigenous people and communities so they have the opportunity to fully participate in land and sea management, drawing on their significant and unique knowledge, skills and responsibilities. 

AIATSIS completed three case studies in the joint management of conservation and Indigenous Protected Areas (IPAs) in partnership with the Australian Collaboration, the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) and the Poola Foundation (Tom Kantor Fund), as part of the AIATSIS 'Success in Aboriginal Organisations' Project.

Within this project, Ms Toni Bauman completed a case study of Nitmiluk (Katherine Gorge) National Park. Mr Dermot Smyth carried out two case studies on the Dhimurru Indigenous Protected Area and the Booderee National Park in the ACT.

On 3 and 4 April 2012, the Northern Territory Department of Natural Resources, Environment, The Arts and Sport (NRETAS) and the Native Title Research Unit (NTRU) at the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies (AIATSIS) convened a workshop of state, territory and Commonwealth government staff working in joint management and native title at the Alice Springs Desert Park. The workshop was titled Joint Management of Protected Areas in Australia: Native Title and Other Pathways towards a Community of Practice.

This report captures the workshop where government staff working in joint management shared information about their approach and identified practical issues in developing a community of practice.

Much of the attention paid to native title in Australia has focused on court proceedings and other legalities, but what does it actually mean to live with native title? This book presents the experiences of native title holders and the corporations they have established to look after their native title interests.

The influence of the renowned High Court Mabo case is such that there are already more than 100 Registered Native Title Bodies Corporate (RNTBCs) across Australia with responsibilities for about 18 per cent of the continent. RNTBCs operate in a profoundly intercultural context where ‘western’ and Indigenous laws are constantly interpreted and negotiated as part of a new suite of landholding and land management practices for contemporary Australia.

Through seven case studies from the Torres Strait, Far North Queensland, the Kimberley and Central Australia, Living with native title documents the experiences of RNTBCs, including those that are parties to large mining agreements. Each case study is accompanied by a short update written immediately prior to publication.

Living with native title is a product of the AIATSIS research project Prescribed Bodies Corporate: Research Action Partnerships.

The topic 'Management and staff' from the Indigenous Governance Toolkit has six sections,

1. Management and staff
2. Managing the organisation
3. The governing body and management
4. Managing staff
5. Staff development and training
6. Case studies

The NTRU has compiled toolkits for Prescibed Bodies Corporate (PBCs). These toolkits have been created to assist native title holders to access information and resources regarding funding and training opportunities that may be relevant to their PBCs.

The need for such toolkits was highlighted in the 2007 Australian Government report ‘Structures and Processes of Prescribed Bodies Corporate’ (Recommendation 2). 

National PBC Funding & Training Guide 2017

The national toolkit provides information and access to resources about:

1. Funding
   • Searching for government and non-government funding
   • Relevant funding for PBCs available through government sector sorted by subject
   • Resources identifying PBC funding assistance sorted by subject
   • Grant writing assistance and training

2. Training information
3. Other Assistance

One of the key aspirations of native title holders is the ability to independently make decisions about and take care of country. This aspiration is often realised through collaborative management arrangements such as joint management. For many native title groups, joint management is often the only substantive land management outcome, yet there has been little research into either its planning process or its drivers.

Between October 2013 and December 2014, AIATSIS undertook case study research in partnership with Central Desert Native Title Services and the Wiluna native title holders — Martu people — to document their land management journey and the critical success factors that have contributed to positive outcomes in Matuwa (Lorna Glen) and Kurrara Kurrara (Earaheedy). This report describes the research and planning undertaken as a part of the partnership.

ORIC newsletter about the role of the CEO

In recent decades, various forms of co-management of national parks and other protected areas1 by governments and Indigenous people have come to the fore. This has occurred as Indigenous peoples have progressively demanded greater access to and decisionmaking power over their traditional lands. The response of governments has also seen the aligning of a number of policy approaches that have contributed to an increase in attention to co-management. In the first instance, there has been a rapid rise in the number of protected areas in Australia since the 1960s, and this is continuing as the Commonwealth Government aims to increase the size of the Australian National Reserve System (NRS) by 25 per cent and Australia’s network of terrestrial protected areas to 125 million hectares by 2013 (Caring for Our Country 2013a).2 In addition, at least 16 per cent of Australia’s land area is now held by Indigenous peoples under a range of tenures, with much of this land being of high biodiversity value (Altman & Kerins 2012). As a mechanism for adding new protected areas to the NRS, the Commonwealth Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPaC) has an Indigenous Protected Area (IPA) program that supports traditional owners of lands or seas who voluntarily dedicate their lands as protected areas to promote biodiversity and cultural resource conservation. IPAs now form the second largest component of the National Reserve System, covering over 3 per cent of Australia and making up 23 per cent of the NRS (SEWPaC 2013b).

To assist community legal centres (CLCs) to meet the cultural safety standards in the National Accreditation Scheme (NAS), the National Association of Community Legal Centres (NACLC) has developed this Guide to assist NACLC and CLCs to improve the attraction, recruitment, support and retention of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees in the sector. 

Presentation provided to the Yamatji Marlpa Aboriginal Corporation (YMAC) training workshop for native title anthropologists. It gives an overview of the three year project, its case studies, challenges and results. 

Taungurung Land and Waters Council and AIATSIS collaboratively produced a decision-making guide for Taungurung people to use in governance.

The guide contains practical information on:

• Compliance and legal requirements
• Decision-making models
• Separation of powers
• Conflicts of interest
• Subsidiarity
• Cultural governance

The guide is of practical use for Taungurung Land and Waters Council in governance, assisting communication and engagement, inducting new board members, and managing disagreements about procedures and policies.

It will also be of interest to other Indigenous corporations that are working on their own decision-making structures, processes and models, particularly native title Prescribed Bodies Corporate (PBCs) and other traditional owner corporations.

The Far West Coast journey from Applicant through to Consent Determination and holding Native Title has been an exciting one. There have been considerable challenges and we have faced many obstacles. Along the way we have also learnt many valuable lessons, not the least that we needed even more change and further development once Native Title was granted and we began a new life as a PBC.

Today, as a young PBC we are on track to be a self-supporting and stand-alone resource for our members. We now have commercial ventures, investments and an Aboriginal Trust that we own and operate. Our presentation seeks to share how we got here and the changes to structures, practices and our organisation to achieve early success as a PBC and a group of entities.

Short factsheet about joint ventures.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community governance can be greatly impacted by the nature of the land tenure held or managed by the community. The fragmented system of national and state regimes which provide grants or titles of land to Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander people has enabled a governance landscape where there are often overlapping rights to land. This creates a situation where relationships within an Indigenous community – and even within a traditional owner group – are competing for power and control. This is most notable with respect to how different community organisations compete for community funding, the durability of culturally appropriate governance structures and the taking of natural resources.

The ability of an Indigenous community to resolve potential conflicts, created by the recognition of native title and adapt to the post-determination landscape also impacts upon a communities’ ability to respond to external pressures such as land use planning, water management and government initiated tenure reform processes. Often these conflicts appear between Registered Native Title Bodies Corporate and community or local shire councils – who have historically played the role of land manager and program administrator. This paper looks at the role of cultural governance in supporting the recognition of Indigenous landholdings and the reasons that Indigenous landholdings, in their current form, have failed to be effective in adequately mobilising economic, social and cultural resources to achieve social, cultural, environmental and health benefits in remote Indigenous communities in Western Australia and Queensland.